RE: Abstractism

From: Keith Henson (
Date: Tue Jan 29 2002 - 00:29:46 GMT

  • Next message: Wade T. Smith: "Re: Meme bonding"

    Received: by id AAA05445 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Tue, 29 Jan 2002 00:39:14 GMT
    Message-Id: <>
    X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
    Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 19:29:46 -0500
    From: Keith Henson <>
    Subject: RE: Abstractism
    In-Reply-To: <>
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
    Precedence: bulk

    At 01:12 PM 28/01/02 -0800, "Grant Callaghan" <>

    >> > From: Grant Callaghan []
    >> > I'm rapidly approaching the conclusion that no two people can
    >> > agree on what
    >> > the term "meme" refers to.
    >>Which helps the 'meme' replicate. I understand there is research in press
    >>(Wheeler) which identifies 9 different communities of scientists
    >>using variations in their interpretatation of 'gene'. Signifiers get
    >>replicated but do not have to show fidelity of 'signified' (as I have
    >>asserted before)
    >I've heard that the "gene" concept has several problems that obscure a
    >clear picture of what a gene is. For one thing, genes are not expressed
    >until they are used and how they are used can change what they are used for.

    This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jan 29 2002 - 00:47:39 GMT